View Full Version : How relevant are Oliver Bowden's original work, canonically?

12-30-2012, 02:47 PM
I've been reading Forsaken recently, and came across the point where Haytham goes to assassinate Miko at the theatre. However, I instantly felt that something was off. So I quickly booted up AC3 and replayed that memory.




When I first played AC3, and even now when I replayed this, the impression I got from this, was that this target was someone that Haytham used to know closely, not someone who he met once in a fight and stole a hidden blade from. Also, In the book, Bowden has conveniently skipped how he says "Haytham", before saying "You should've come to me". And in the first place, why would someone he just met once in a fight say something like "you should've come to me?"

Thoughts about this?

Oh, and there's also the case of Haytham's name. In an interview or Q&A, Hutchinson said that the name is of Anglo European origin, but Bowden's book says it's Arabic. Personally, I'm more inclined towards going by Hutchinson's word on that.

12-30-2012, 04:09 PM
Well i read somewhere that the book is the story they planned and the game is the final product.So the are both correct in another way. But i'am not completly sure.

12-30-2012, 05:40 PM
Everything the books says is true, unless it contradicts the game then whatever the game says is true.

12-30-2012, 06:35 PM
Since I'm reading Forsaken, I see nothing too unusual. But yes, the way Bowden handled this was very strange. Otherwise, I'm considering it canon.